US formally moves to dismiss criminal case against Boeing over crashes
The US Justice Department has formally moved to dismiss a criminal fraud charge against Boeing and asked a judge to cancel an upcoming trial connected to two plane crashes that killed 346 people off the coast of Indonesia and in Ethiopia.
The deal, announced last week, will allow the American aircraft manufacturer to avoid criminal prosecution for allegedly misleading US regulators about the 737 Max jetliner before the planes crashed less than five months apart in 2018 and 2019.
Advertisement
The 'agreement in principle' will require the company to pay and invest more than 1.1 billion dollars (£814.7 million), including an additional 445 million dollars (£329 million) for the crash victims' families, in return for dismissing the criminal case, according to court documents.
Dismissing the fraud charge will allow the manufacturer to avoid a possible criminal conviction that could have jeopardised the company's status as a federal contractor, experts have said.
US District Judge Reed O'Connor in Fort Worth, Texas, will decide whether to accept the motion to dismiss, accept the terms of the non-prosecution agreement and cancel the trial.
Mr O'Connor on Thursday ordered all the lawyers to present him with a briefing schedule on the government's motion by June 4.
Advertisement
Some relatives of the passengers who died in the crashes have been pushing for a public trial, the prosecution of former company officials, and more severe financial punishment for Boeing.
The Justice Department has noted that the victims' families had mixed views on the proposed deal.
Nadia Milleron, a Massachusetts resident whose 24-year-old daughter, Samya Stumo, died in the Ethiopia crash, in an email Thursday said it hurt her to read the Justice Department's 'false' statement that the agreement will secure meaningful accountability, deliver public benefits and bring finality to a complex case whose outcome would otherwise be uncertain.
'This is not a difficult or complex case because Boeing signed a confession,' Ms Milleron said.
Advertisement
'There will be no accountability as a result of the NPA (non-prosecution deal).'
Boeing said in a statement that the company is committed to complying with its obligations under the resolution, including commitments to further institutional improvements and investments, as well as additional compensation for families of those who died in the two plane crashes.
'We are deeply sorry for their losses, and remain committed to honouring their loved ones' memories by pressing forward with the broad and deep changes to our company that we have made to strengthen our safety system and culture,' a Boeing spokesperson said in the statement.
Lawyer Mark Lindquist, who represents dozens of the victims' families, said in a statement on Thursday that although he had wanted to see a more vigorous prosecution, he did not think it was going to happen.
Advertisement
'At this point, I can only hope the criminal case and the lawsuits motivated Boeing to improve safety,' Mr Lindquist said.
'That's what really matters. We all want to walk onto a Boeing plane and feel safe.'
Boeing was accused of misleading the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) about aspects of the Max before the agency certified the plane for flight.
Boeing did not tell airlines and pilots about a new software system that could turn the plane's nose down without input from pilots if a sensor detected that the plane might go into an aerodynamic stall.
Advertisement
The Max planes crashed after a faulty reading from the sensor pushed the nose down and pilots were unable to regain control.
After the second crash, Max jets were grounded until the company redesigned the software.
The Justice Department charged Boeing in 2021 with deceiving FAA regulators about the software and about how much training pilots would need to fly the plane safely.
The department agreed not to prosecute Boeing at the time, however, if the company paid a 2.5 billion dollar (£1.8 billion) settlement, including the 243.6 million dollar (£180 million) fine, and took steps to comply with anti-fraud laws for three years.
But last year, federal prosecutors said Boeing violated the terms of the 2021 agreement by failing to make promised changes to detect and prevent violations of federal anti-fraud laws.
Boeing agreed last July to plead guilty to the felony fraud charge instead of enduring what could have been a lengthy public trial.
Then, in December, Mr O'Connor rejected the plea deal.
The judge said the diversity, inclusion and equity (DEI) policies in the government and at Boeing could result in race being a factor in picking a monitor to oversee Boeing's compliance with the agreement.
Under the new agreement, Boeing must retain an 'independent compliance consultant' who will make recommendations for 'further improvement' and report back to the government, court documents said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Belfast Telegraph
18 minutes ago
- Belfast Telegraph
US Supreme Court asked to pause order reinstating Education Department staff
The Justice Department's emergency appeal to the high court on Friday said US District Judge Myong Joun in Boston exceeded his authority last month when he issued a preliminary injunction reversing the lay-offs of nearly 1,400 people and putting the broader plan on hold. Mr Joun's order has blocked one of Mr Trump's biggest campaign promises and effectively stalled the effort to wind down the department. A federal appeals court refused to put the order on hold while the administration appealed. The judge wrote that the lay-offs 'will likely cripple the department'. But Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote on Friday that Mr Joun was substituting his policy preferences for those of the Trump administration. The lay-offs help put in place the 'policy of streamlining the department and eliminating discretionary functions that, in the administration's view, are better left to the states', Mr Sauer wrote. He also pointed out that the Supreme Court in April voted 5-4 to block Mr Joun's earlier order seeking to keep in place Education Department teacher-training grants. The current case involves two consolidated lawsuits that said Mr Trump's plan amounted to an illegal closure of the Education Department. One suit was filed by the Somerville and Easthampton school districts in Massachusetts along with the American Federation of Teachers and other education groups. The other suit was filed by a coalition of 21 Democratic attorneys general. The suits argued that the lay-offs left the department unable to carry out responsibilities required by Congress, including duties to support special education, distribute financial aid and enforce civil rights laws. Mr Trump has made it a priority to shut down the Education Department, though he has acknowledged that only Congress has the authority to do that. In the meantime, Mr Trump issued a March order directing Education Secretary Linda McMahon to wind it down 'to the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law'. Mr Trump later said the department's functions will be parcelled to other agencies, suggesting federal student loans should be managed by the Small Business Administration and programmes involving students with disabilities would be absorbed by the Department of Health and Human Services. Those changes have not yet happened. The president argues that the Education Department has been overtaken by liberals and has failed to spur improvements to the nation's lagging academic scores. He has promised to 'return education to the states'. Opponents note that K-12 education is already mostly overseen by states and cities. Democrats have blasted the Trump administration's Education Department budget, which seeks a 15% budget cut including a 4.5 billion dollar cut in K-12 funding as part of the agency's downsizing.
South Wales Argus
18 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
US Supreme Court asked to pause order reinstating Education Department staff
The Justice Department's emergency appeal to the high court on Friday said US District Judge Myong Joun in Boston exceeded his authority last month when he issued a preliminary injunction reversing the lay-offs of nearly 1,400 people and putting the broader plan on hold. Mr Joun's order has blocked one of Mr Trump's biggest campaign promises and effectively stalled the effort to wind down the department. A federal appeals court refused to put the order on hold while the administration appealed. The judge wrote that the lay-offs 'will likely cripple the department'. But Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote on Friday that Mr Joun was substituting his policy preferences for those of the Trump administration. The lay-offs help put in place the 'policy of streamlining the department and eliminating discretionary functions that, in the administration's view, are better left to the states', Mr Sauer wrote. He also pointed out that the Supreme Court in April voted 5-4 to block Mr Joun's earlier order seeking to keep in place Education Department teacher-training grants. The current case involves two consolidated lawsuits that said Mr Trump's plan amounted to an illegal closure of the Education Department. One suit was filed by the Somerville and Easthampton school districts in Massachusetts along with the American Federation of Teachers and other education groups. The other suit was filed by a coalition of 21 Democratic attorneys general. The suits argued that the lay-offs left the department unable to carry out responsibilities required by Congress, including duties to support special education, distribute financial aid and enforce civil rights laws. Mr Trump has made it a priority to shut down the Education Department, though he has acknowledged that only Congress has the authority to do that. In the meantime, Mr Trump issued a March order directing Education Secretary Linda McMahon to wind it down 'to the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law'. Mr Trump later said the department's functions will be parcelled to other agencies, suggesting federal student loans should be managed by the Small Business Administration and programmes involving students with disabilities would be absorbed by the Department of Health and Human Services. Those changes have not yet happened. The president argues that the Education Department has been overtaken by liberals and has failed to spur improvements to the nation's lagging academic scores. He has promised to 'return education to the states'. Opponents note that K-12 education is already mostly overseen by states and cities. Democrats have blasted the Trump administration's Education Department budget, which seeks a 15% budget cut including a 4.5 billion dollar cut in K-12 funding as part of the agency's downsizing.
The Independent
20 minutes ago
- The Independent
U.S., Chinese officials to meet in London next week for new round of trade talks
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.
